THE COURTS.

Press, Volume LVIII, Issue 17464, 26 May 1922, Page 4

THE COURTS.

MAGISTERIAL. THURSDAY. (Before Mr H. Y. Widdowson, S.M.) . DRUNKENNESS. A statutory first oSender was fined 10s, in default 24 hours' imprisonment. THEFT OF AN OVERCOAT. "* GeorgJ Ranger, an American, aged 20 years, was charged with the theft, on May 23rd of nn overcoat valued at £G, the property of W. Strange and Co. He pleaded guilty, and a remand was granted until tomorrow, in order that more enquiries might be made regarding him. William Broome Cant, aged 36 years, formerly ft dog tax collector to the Akaroa, County Council, was charged that, between October 14th and December 16th, 1019, at Duvaucheile, he fraudulently omitted to pay JE29 5s to the County Council. Chief-Detective A. Cameron said accused had been (arrested in New South Wales. He asked for'a remand for eight days, in oi'der that witnesses could be brought from Akaroa. The remand was granted, and bail was refused. CHARGE OF VAGRANCY. A quarter-caste Maori girl, aged 18 years, was charged with being an idle and disorderly person, having insufficient lawful visible means of support. The Magistrate adjourned the case sine die, the girl to place herself in the hands of the matron of the Salvation Army Home in the meantime. He requested that the name should not be published. CIVIL BUSINESS. Judgment by default was given for plaintiff in each of the following cases:—Robert Francis, Ltd. v. Harold Waters, £3l 19s; the Canterbury Motor Co., Ltd. v. 11. F. Williams and Co., £l6 lis 2d; John Blakeway v. _H. Wakefield, £7 lis sd; W. Strange and Co., Ltd. v. W. J.' Stev art, £1 15s 3d; James Carter v. Herbert Frederick Williams, trading as Loughrey and Tully, £22 8s lid; H. F. Williams and Co. v. George Yeatman, £2B 15s 9d; J. L. Bennett v. William Ponninghaus, £34 7s 6d; Maling and Co., Ltd. v. Herbert Frederick Williams, £23 14s; C. Jessop and Co. v. E. Pearson, £lB 9s Id. JUDGMENT SUMMONS CASE. F. J. Smith was ordered to pay to F. D. Kesteven the sum of £24 Is forthwith on a judgment summons, in default four weeks' imprisonment. CLAIM AND COUNTER-CLAIM. Frank G. Gibbs, chaff cutting contractor, of Rangiora • (Mr F. S. Wilding), proceeded against Caesar Roose, sawmiller, of Mercer, Auckland (Mr H. H. Hanna) for £IOO, the balance of the purchase money of a traction engine.' Roose admitted the claim, and counterclaimed for £2OO for alleged breach of warranty. Defendant alleged that the engine Bold t» him had to be repaired to the extent of £2OO. Judgment was given for Gibbs on both the claim and the counter-claim, with costs. BREACH OF AWARD. Thomas George Fielder, Inspector of Awards, proceeded against the Christchurch Press Co., Ltd., newspaper printers (Mr R. A. Cuthbert), claiming £lO as penalty for a breach of the Canterbury Typographers' award. Plaintiff alleged that the defendant company, being a £ arty to the award, failed, from May 31st, 1921, to June 31st, 1922, to allow one Peter Maurice, a worker engaged in the production of a. newspaper, one week's holiday as required by the. award. Mr Fielder stated that Maurice received a. fortnight's holiday in May, 1920. He was brought under the present award in September, 1920, and up to the time of the institu-

tion of proceedings, had not received his holiday due in May, 1921. Peter Maurice, a Btone hand employed in connexion with the "Weekly Prees and Referee," sard he had been with the Press Company for 38 years. He did not get all -the usual public holidays, but had, before his inclusion in the award, received a fortnight's holiday each year in lieu of overtime worked. This was a private arrangement with the company. He received 14 days[ holiday in "May, 1920, but did not receive his next leave until a week after Easter, 1922. He still worked from five to six hours' overtime tier week. After an interview with the printer he had suggested to take his holidays at Easter, but he did not get them until a week later. To Mr Cuthbert: It was only since September; 1920, that he had come under the award. He worked 42 hours a week. Mr Cuthbert contended that the annual holidays due to Maurice dated from September 13th, 1920, when the award came into force. That was the interpretation put on the award bv Mr Justice Stringer, who held that "provision for payment for holidays operates from September 13th, 1926." The year of service, dated from September, 1920, and the holidays ive;-e_due in September, lP2l! Thf> Labour Department held they were due in May, 1921. Maurice received his leave in April, 1922, and it was a Question whether it was six o r eleven months late. There was no desire on the part of the employers to deprive him of his holidays; in fact, they had given him 14 days instead of the seven required in the award. Frederick John Board, printer for the Press Company, sai-.l that ft «- a8 owing to pressure of work and at Maurice's own suggestion that he had not been given his holidays earlier than April. The Magistrate said that Maurice was not a party to the award in :19?0. and he received his holidays in May of that year. His ?ooi w aj ' B T. ere " thel 'efore. due in May, 19.i1. Tim question of reasonable time should govern each case. He held that the period elapse-1 even since September was not a m?«T We w taße! a . brea <* teen com. W H°wever, it was not a esse for a heavy penalty, rsp ? cially as k fortnight's instead of a week's hol.day had been Granted A nominal penalty of 5s would be inflicted. JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT. .* A- i J Ar Sim P son > .gardener, of "Winchester E A ( W & V C ° nnal) ' claim * d f«m Mrl ni. ■ 1 L Wel 2 b ' flolist ' ot 282 High street Chnstchurch (Mr C. S. Thomas)? the BUm dismLal. WeekS Wag 6iD UCU 0f noti <* of -, . A£tcr hewing evidence, the Magistrate eave-ju-.lgment for defendant. g IN OTHER PLACES. SLY GROG SELLING. ' teIIESS ASSOCIATION TELEGRAM.) At ♦>, t. ,• DUNEDIN, May 25. .„„/ Po1 "* Court Peter George Petirof ilv De ' w ; a ? s«*» £9 ° ™ three chaxgi 01 Bly E r °S jelling at South DunediaT